Cases 1 - 10 of 1,708
Bingham v. Shaw et al
as 1:2024cv01034
Plaintiff:
Ta'Kuan Bingham and Ta
Defendant:
Jefferey William Shaw, Monique Watson Donner, Dana Anne Fantozzi and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Burton et al v. Bluefield Realty Group, LLC et al
as 7:2024cv01800
Plaintiff:
Shauntell Burton, Benny D. Cheatham, Robert Douglass and others
Defendant:
Bluefield Realty Group, LLC, Allen Tate Real Estate, LLC, McClendon Realty, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Anti-trust
Graham v. Koninklijke Philips NV et al
as 2:2024cv03408
Defendant:
Philips RS North America LLC, Koninklijke Philips NV, Philips North America LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Brenda Graham
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Respess et al v. VMI Alumni Association
as 6:2024cv00028
Plaintiff:
William L. Respess, Dean Barr, Hugh P. Brien and others
Defendant:
VMI Alumni Association
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Michael Grace v. Alamance County
as 24-6538
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JERMAINE GRACE
Defendant:
ALAMANCE COUNTY, GRAHAM POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER CROSS and others
Schiff v. Getty et al
as 1:2024cv01605
Plaintiff:
Graham Schiff
Defendant:
Jeffrey Getty and Craig Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1985 Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights
Hunt v. Jackson et al
as 5:2024ct03141
Plaintiff:
Michael Eugene Hunt
Defendant:
Darren G. Jackson, Graham H. Atkinson, Gregory K. Moss and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
BROOKS v. RICKER et al
as 1:2024cv00467
Plaintiff:
RASHAWN A. BROOKS
Defendant:
OFFICER RICKER, OFFICER JONES, OFFICER SMITH and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Richman v. Graham
as 9:2024cv01635
Petitioner:
Ulysses Richman
Respondent:
Warden Graham
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
